The 31-year-old compliance consultant from Hendersonville, Tennessee, said she couldn’t stop vomiting.

“Sunday morning, it all hits,” McClain recalled, as she described what happened that weekend in January. “I can’t keep anything down.”

McClain said she thought the dosage the telehealth company had prescribed seemed too high. She tried to contact her doctor, but when she didn’t get an immediate response, she said she called the company and a “care team” representative confirmed the instructions — which said to inject 2.21 milligrams of the semaglutide medication once a week — were correct.

It turned out, however, that was nearly nine times the amount patients are typically told to take for their first dose.

Nearly a month after she was diagnosed with an overdose, McClain said she was “still dealing with the residual side effects,” including an elevated heart rate and vision problems she felt were tied to the medication.

Most patients who have taken a GLP-1 received their prescription through a primary care doctor or a specialist, shows. But as the uptake of telehealth has grown substantially since the start of the covid pandemic, McClain is one of millions of Americans who have used online companies to meet a variety of their medical needs.

Many of the companies have started offering GLP-1 medications for weight loss as demand for these drugs has exploded. But certain medication errors tied to GLP-1s have exploded too, according to a 麻豆女优 Health News review of Food and Drug Administration data, and physicians and telemedicine researchers worry that adverse experiences tied to telehealth companies are becoming more common.

Bad outcomes aren’t unique to telehealth providers or to the compounded weight loss drugs many of them offer. In fact, product liability lawsuits alleging patient injuries have been filed overwhelmingly against pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, which manufacture name-brand weight loss drugs, court data shows. The drugmakers have defended their products.

However, some critics are also concerned that getting a weight loss prescription online is usually much easier than getting one through an in-person appointment. Not only do many telehealth companies write quick prescriptions for GLP-1s, but they often sell the medications, too, allowing patients to bypass in-person pharmacy visits. This one-stop shopping isn’t necessarily a good thing, according to critics who say some telehealth providers are writing prescriptions for people who should not be taking GLP-1s and then providing little or no follow-up care.

“It gives a black eye to telemedicine,” said Elizabeth Krupinski, an experimental psychologist at Emory University who has conducted research on the effectiveness of telehealth.

Telemedicine stands to benefit “so many people,” Krupinski said, particularly when the technology is integrated within a larger healthcare system. That way, patients benefit from the convenience of telehealth while maintaining a connection with their in-person providers.

But some telehealth companies are marketing GLP-1s as an easy way to lose weight — sometimes with the help of paid celebrity endorsements — without emphasizing the importance of healthy eating and exercise, she said.

They may be following the letter of the law, Krupinski said. But writing prescriptions while skimping on care “is not in the Hippocratic oath.”

The Perfect Storm

Starting around 2020, many states loosened restrictions on telehealth, which allowed online companies to proliferate. This helped accommodate patients who could not, or chose not to, be seen in person at the height of covid transmission.

Expanded telehealth access was also intended to lower barriers in rural communities, as well as mitigate doctor and nurse shortages. In many places, telehealth doctors and nurses are legally allowed to treat patients across state lines. But the way telemedicine is practiced , and state laws largely dictate rules that telehealth providers must follow.

Some companies, such as Mochi Health, require patients to meet virtually with a provider, such as a doctor, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant, before they can get a GLP-1 prescription.

But others, including Ro, sometimes require nothing more of patients than an “asynchronous” evaluation, which does not include a live conversation with a healthcare provider. During this type of evaluation, customers are typically asked to fill out an intake form and answer a medical history questionnaire before they are evaluated for a prescription. Ro requires a conversation in real time when required by state law, or when requested by a patient or clinician, said Nicholas Samonas, a spokesperson for the company.

“Every patient is counseled by their provider on the potential benefits and risks of treatment based on their individual medical history,” Samonas said. Ro’s clinicians can order lab work when necessary and, when appropriate, may recommend patients seek in-person care, he said.

But some medical experts are concerned that virtual care may be insufficient for prescribing weight loss drugs.

Patients with a history of pancreatitis, for example, should be counseled about potential complications, medical studies show. The same goes for people with a condition called gastroparesis, which affects stomach nerves and muscles, and those susceptible to medullary thyroid cancer.

Some patients may also benefit from blood work or muscle mass screening before starting a GLP-1.

But not all telehealth companies are adequately evaluating patients before writing prescriptions, said Marc-Andre Cornier, an endocrinologist at the Medical University of South Carolina and the immediate past president of The Obesity Society.

When it comes to parsing the good from the bad, “whose job is it to police that?” he asked. The problem, he said, is there aren’t criteria written by a government agency or a medical society to determine which providers are treating patients appropriately and which aren’t.

While the first GLP-1 was approved by the FDA more than 20 years ago, to treat Type 2 diabetes, the use of these drugs took off in 2021 when Novo Nordisk received approval for a semaglutide drug to treat obesity, with the brand name Wegovy. In a 2025 麻豆女优 poll, said they had taken a GLP-1.

In a in The New England Journal of Medicine, physician Amanda Banks noted that the proportion of GLP-1 prescriptions written for people who were not diabetic, obese, or overweight increased from 4.5% in 2018 to 17% in 2023.

In the paper, Banks called it “troubling” how easy it is to obtain a prescription for weight loss drugs and worried they might exacerbate existing eating disorders or cause new cases, including of anorexia.

Cornier, who has received compensation from Novo Nordisk for serving as a consultant, echoed some of Banks’ concerns. “It’s not just filling out a form online and then having some random healthcare provider sign off on it,” he said. “There are concerns with some of these online programs that there’s not a proper evaluation, there’s not a baseline, and there’s not proper supervision.”

The American Telemedicine Association, which advocates for the expansion of “digitally enabled care,” has not addressed how telehealth providers prescribe GLP-1s, spokesperson Gina Cella said.

“This is a bit out of our scope,” Cella said, when asked if the association had addressed the topic of telehealth providers and GLP-1 prescriptions.

The lack of clarity makes choosing a company potentially confusing for patients, and the medical profession is partly to blame, said Jamy Ard, an obesity doctor and researcher at Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Doctors have historically done a bad job counseling patients about weight loss, and many people aren’t comfortable talking to their primary care doctor about it, Ard said. Patients think, “Why would I go to my doctor and have them say, ‘Eat less and move more,’ when I have heard that a million times and I don’t want to have that lecture again?” Ard said.

This problem, combined with past shortages of name-brand versions of GLP-1s, such as Ozempic, Mounjaro, and Trulicity, has created a “perfect storm” for telehealth companies to flourish, said Ard, who has received support from pharmaceutical and telehealth companies.

While some telehealth companies prescribe only name-brand weight loss drugs, many also offer cheaper, compounded versions. They act as intermediaries between customers and mail-order compounding pharmacies, which create GLP-1s by mixing active ingredients, such as semaglutide, with additives. The ingredients for compounded drugs are commonly sourced from overseas suppliers, and the formulations are not reviewed by the FDA for safety.

The environment is “very much uncontrolled and poorly, if at all, regulated,” Ard said. “There is just no standard of care.”

Emily Hilliard, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, told 麻豆女优 Health News that compounded drugs “should only be used in patients whose medical needs cannot be met by an FDA-approved drug.”

Hilliard said the agency urges “consumers to be vigilant and know the source of their medicine.”

Understanding the Risks

While weight loss drugs have helped millions of people lose weight, they’re not without risk, the data shows.

A 麻豆女优 Health News data analysis of the FDA’s Adverse Event Monitoring System found that medication errors made by providers or patients with popular weight loss drugs exploded from just over 2,000 reports in 2020 to over 25,000 in 2025. Those self-reported events involved semaglutide, tirzepatide, dulaglutide, and liraglutide, the generic names for leading GLP-1s.

Among frequent issues cited in the adverse event reports were administration of an extra or incorrect dose, issues with communication about a product, and prescribing errors.

Since 2019, the National Poison Data System has fielded a related to overdoses or side effects from injectable weight loss drugs. The data does not distinguish between overdoses tied to a telehealth prescription and those stemming from an in-person medical appointment, but it is a reflection of how prevalent these drugs have become.

Yet data on potential medication errors and adverse reactions to GLP-1 medications is incomplete, because many issues are never reported to federal officials.

For example, in a , the FDA accused drugmaker Novo Nordisk, the maker of Wegovy and Ozempic, of failing to report some adverse events to the federal government, including suicidal ideation and death.

Nobody knows how often adverse events occur, said Kristen Nixon, a Johns Hopkins University researcher who has studied posts about weight loss drugs on Reddit, a popular online forum.

Her team analyzed hundreds of Reddit posts from 2020 through last August and identified frequent mentions of drug reactions and user errors, such as patients’ not knowing how to correctly dose and inject the medication.

But another finding also stood out to her.

“Wow, there are a lot of people talking about telehealth,” Nixon recalled thinking. Reddit commenters said they got GLP-1 prescriptions from scores of telehealth platforms, Nixon found. Commenters also mentioned several dozen compounding pharmacies — often in the same posts about telehealth.

Pharmacies are typically required to counsel patients on medications they receive. But Nixon’s research found that telehealth companies often mail the medications directly, meaning patients do not need to go to a pharmacy.

“Anecdotally, it seems like the telehealth companies are really facilitating access to compounded medications,” Nixon said.

Leslie Gammon, 54, an office manager from Wendell, North Carolina, said she turned to a telehealth company called Amble Health for a weight loss drug prescription. She was given a GLP-1 after filling out an online form, she said.

Like McClain, when she received her mail-order compounded medication in late October, she thought the dosage that accompanied it seemed too high. She’d received a box of semaglutide earlier in the month with a much lower dose. But the refill she received was a stronger formulation, and the instructions told Gammon to inject three times the volume she had been taking in previous weeks.

Even though she injected slightly less than that recommended amount before bed on a Sunday evening, she woke up in the middle of the night “throwing up every 20 to 25 minutes,” she said. And it didn’t stop until Tuesday. She was eventually admitted to a hospital in Raleigh and now owes the hospital over $9,000, a medical bill shows.

Amble Health did not respond to questions for this article.

The delivery system for injectable versions of weight loss drugs is more complicated than for a pill. In its National Poison Data System alert, America’s Poison Centers noted that some people reported “accidentally taking 10-times the recommended dose due to confusing measurement units while using a syringe.”

And people who are eager to lose extra weight — before a wedding or a vacation, for example — may choose to self-administer a higher-than-recommended dose, said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine.

Some telehealth companies aren’t doing enough, he said, to make sure patients understand the risks or the complex delivery system associated with the injectable drugs.

“The consent is not adequate,” Caplan said. “There’s no probing to see if you understood anything.”

Cella, with the American Telemedicine Association, said the group has not addressed the difficulty of educating patients about the risks of injecting weight loss drugs. But she pointed to the association’s “,” which states that telehealth business models “must put the patient first.”

Proceed With Caution

Pharmaceutical companies must list potentially harmful side effects when they advertise the name-brand versions of their FDA-approved medications. Potential include nausea, vomiting, changes in vision, low blood sugar, and, in rare cases, thyroid cancer. Meanwhile, telehealth companies have not historically followed the same rules that drugmakers have in disclosing medication risks in advertisements. But the FDA has started cracking down on misleading drug ads.

A national shortage of weight loss medications in 2022 opened the door for compounding pharmacies to manufacture these drugs. But since the FDA declared the shortage over last year, companies that offer compounded drugs are increasingly facing legal and regulatory challenges related to their marketing tactics.

Mounjaro manufacturer Eli Lilly and other drugmakers are suing multiple telehealth companies for promoting compounded versions of their drugs. In one legal complaint, Eli Lilly alleged Mochi Health had engaged in “deceptive” business tactics. In a motion to dismiss the lawsuit last year, lawyers for Mochi Health called the complaint part of a “nationwide campaign to bolster Lilly’s profits by dictating patient care through the elimination of compounded drugs as a treatment option for weight management.” The lawsuit is ongoing.

Eli Lilly spokesperson Michael Jamison said in a written comment that telehealth companies sued by the drug manufacturer threaten “patient safety by falsely promoting supposedly ‘personalized’ compounded tirzepatide” and mislead “consumers about the safety, clinical testing, and effectiveness of their compounded knockoffs.”

Meanwhile, Novo Nordisk has filed 130 lawsuits against “entities engaged in unlawful marketing and sale of knockoff semaglutide drugs,” said Liz Skrbkova, a spokesperson for the drugmaker.

She said the company is committed to “protecting patients from unapproved knockoff drugs made with foreign, inauthentic active pharmaceutical ingredients that pose significant safety and efficacy risks.”

The Trump administration sent a in September and February to online companies such as , , , and . The FDA said these and other companies had made false or misleading claims related to compounded versions of weight loss drugs.

“Your claims imply that your products are the same as an FDA-approved product when they are not,” the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research on Sept. 9. HHS later referred the company to the Department of Justice after it announced the launch of a $49 version of Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy pill.

When asked about the FDA warning, Abby Reisinger-Moley, a spokesperson for Hims & Hers, pointed to a announcing a shift away from compounded weight loss drugs. The company said in the press release that it had entered into an agreement with Novo Nordisk to sell name-brand versions.

Alex Smith, CEO of Join Josie, an online platform that helps women in menopause lose weight by prescribing GLP-1s, said his company also made changes in response to an FDA letter, to include removing Join Josie’s name from medication vials. “Which I agree with,” Smith said, “because you don’t want patients thinking you’re the compounding pharmacy.”

SkinnyRx and Genesis Health International did not respond to requests for comment.

But these warnings aren’t the first time the federal government has stepped in to ensure that telemedicine is being used appropriately, said Mei Wa Kwong, executive director of the Center for Connected Health Policy.

Prior cases involved attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder medications and other controlled substances prescribed by telehealth providers, she said. While those drugs pose more risk to patients than GLP-1s, the companies were also accused of improperly screening potential customers.

The onus still falls on consumers to research companies before signing up for their services, Kwong said.

“Always approach anything on the internet with a hint of skepticism,” Kwong said.

‘Keeps Getting Worse’

McClain, the Tennessee woman hospitalized this year after a GLP-1 overdose, said she lost 50 pounds a few years ago by taking a name-brand GLP-1 prescribed by her doctor.

At the time, the medication was covered by her health insurance. This year, when she was ready to take a GLP-1 again following a pregnancy, the drug was no longer covered for weight loss.

To save money by obtaining a cheaper, compounded GLP-1, McClain signed up for Mochi Health after doing her own research. “That was just the most affordable option,” she said.

But within hours of her first dose, she said, she found herself on the phone with poison control.

After her overdose, McClain said, she spoke to a clinical director at Mochi Health, once by phone but mostly via email, about her lingering symptoms before communication paused.

David Pilip, a spokesperson for Mochi Health, said in a statement that the company would not discuss individual patients due to privacy obligations. But he said adverse events are “immediately flagged” and “investigated with extreme precision.”

“Mochi Health takes patient safety extremely seriously,” Pilip wrote in an email. “We promptly initiated a review and have been in direct and ongoing communication with the patient to reach a resolution. We remain committed to doing so.”

McClain anticipates her healthcare bills related to the hospital stay will total at least $900. She said that to get the $159 refund for her three-month membership and reimbursement for the hospital expenses, she has been asked to sign a document saying she won’t take legal action against the company. Her experience, she said, “just keeps getting worse.”

NBC News producer Jessica Herzberg and 麻豆女优 Health News senior correspondent Fred Schulte contributed to this report.

Do you have an experience using an online company for healthcare services or medicinal products that you think others should know about? Click here to contact our reporting team.

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/glp1-weight-loss-drugs-telehealth-oversight-regulation-compounded-semaglutide/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

“Did we hike this morning?” she asked.

“Yes, we hiked,” said her husband, Steve Francks. “And you did really well.”

But 15 seconds later, she asked the same question: “Did we hike today?”

Anderson, 65, a retired finance executive, doesn’t remember any of it. She can recall what happened that afternoon only because her husband started recording her on his cellphone.

“I was just on this nonstop loop,” she said.

Almost immediately, Francks knew something was wrong. “Jan was out of it,” he said.

He took her to an emergency room in Sedona, where staff initially thought she might be having a stroke. Because the facility wasn’t fully equipped to evaluate or treat stroke patients, Francks said, she was airlifted to a Phoenix-area hospital, where she was admitted.

It turned out she wasn’t having a stroke. Her medical team eventually determined she was probably experiencing , a rare, temporary, and benign memory disorder.

The good news was that her symptoms didn’t last long, and she has suffered no long-term effects from the episode. It took about 24 hours before she was able to start forming new memories, and she was discharged the next day. Anderson and Francks, who split their time between Sedona and Edmonds, Washington, returned to the Pacific Northwest a few weeks later.

Then the bill came.

The Medical Service

The sudden confusion associated with transient global amnesia can also be a sign of a more common neurological condition, so it’s important to rule out other possible causes — such as a stroke, for which timely emergency care can spell the difference between life and death.

Anderson’s records show her care at Abrazo Health’s Arrowhead Campus in Glendale, Arizona, included an electrocardiogram, which can detect underlying cardiac abnormalities, and imaging, which would rule out any vessel blockages that might cause a stroke. She also underwent various lab tests commonly used to diagnose a stroke.

The Bill

$59,181: $35,302 for diagnostic/therapeutic imaging, $8,147 for laboratory services, $8,146 for a special care unit, $5,532 for EKG services, and $2,054 for pharmacy. Anderson’s first bill from Abrazo Health said she owed $15,312.43, citing an insurance adjustment of $43,868.57, even though her insurer had not covered any of the charges.

Anderson said her insurer covered separate charges for the ER and helicopter transfer.

The Billing Problem: Communication Breakdown

The federal No Surprises Act bans out-of-network bills for most emergency services, even if those services are received at an out-of-network facility and are not preapproved by the insurer.

That means the cost of Anderson’s hospital care should have been covered as though it were in-network. At the time, she was insured by Molina Healthcare, through a plan purchased on the federal Affordable Care Act marketplace.

But for a year, Molina declined to pay for her care in Glendale, at one point arguing that her hospital stay required authorization when, or even before, she was admitted.

“I can’t get anyone to resolve it,” Anderson said. “It’s almost $60,000 hanging over my head.”

The first problem arose about two weeks after she was discharged, when Abrazo Health sent Anderson a bill indicating she was a self-pay patient.

The hospital didn’t request her insurance information at any point during her stay, Francks said. He assumed, at the time, that his wife’s financial paperwork had been transferred from the ER in Sedona. It had not.

She called the Glendale hospital and corrected the error.

Then, in late June, Anderson received notice from the hospital indicating she was not a Molina member.

“Your insurance company notified our office that the patient was not a covered member for the services provided by Abrazo Arrowhead Campus on the above referenced service date(s),” the notice said. It showed the total charges for her stay exceeded $59,000.

But when Anderson called Molina to confirm her coverage, she said, the insurance company assured her the claim was being processed.

That didn’t mean Molina was willing to cover her hospital bill.

Anderson spent months trying to resolve the balance. She filed complaints with members of Congress, the Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions, and the Office of the Insurance Commissioner in Washington state.

In an October letter to Washington’s insurance commissioner, an appeal and grievance specialist for Molina wrote that the claim was denied because “inpatient stays require prior authorization, or notification at the time of admission. No notification of admission or prior authorization was received from the hospital, so the claim was denied.”

It continued: “Molina covers out of network emergency services but since this was an inpatient admission authorization is required.”

Nicole Broadhurst, who focuses on medical billing issues as CEO of a , said this dispute appears to rest between the insurer and the medical provider.

She said that Anderson’s insurance information should have been transferred between the first ER and the Glendale hospital. Since it wasn’t, Broadhurst said, Anderson shouldn’t be held liable for her hospital bill. (Broadhurst was not involved in efforts to resolve Anderson’s billing dispute.)

Unfortunately, Broadhurst said, these situations are “not uncommon, even though we have the No Surprises Act.”

The Resolution

Anderson said she was told by Abrazo Health for months that it was working with Molina to resolve the bill. She said she was also told that even if Molina did not cover the full cost of her hospital care, she would not be liable for the balance — but she never received that assurance in writing.

Meanwhile, Molina continued to uphold its decision to deny payment.

After 麻豆女优 Health News contacted the insurer and the hospital with questions about her case, Molina told Anderson it had launched an internal review of her claim, and a revenue director with Abrazo Health told her the company was “treating this as a high-priority matter,” she recalled.

Anderson said the revenue director for the health system assured her that if Molina continued to deny payment, “the balance will be written off on the hospital’s end,” she said. “I will not be responsible for any balance” — not even the $15,312.43 the hospital initially billed her after the hospitalization.

Linda Nofer, a spokesperson for Abrazo Health, would not answer questions about Anderson’s bill. In a statement, she said the hospital system is “committed to working closely with our patients to resolve billing questions and concerns.”

Molina spokesperson Caroline Zubieta would not discuss or respond to questions about Anderson’s case on the record.

The Takeaway

The flurry of insurance paperwork and medical bills patients receive after a hospital stay can be overwhelming — and may sometimes appear contradictory.

Broadhurst said it’s important for patients to focus on the “patient responsibility” portion of an insurance document called an explanation of benefits.

Patients should not pay a bill if their explanation of benefits indicates they aren’t responsible for the amount charged.

In this case, Anderson had received a bill from the hospital saying she owed money. And her explanation of benefits from Molina confirmed she’d racked up more than $59,000 in hospital charges.

But that document also indicated her patient liability was “$0.00.” Anderson said the hospital was not pressuring her to pay the $15,312.43 bill or any of the charges tied to her account, but she was worried she would eventually owe a large sum because the charges remained unresolved for more than a year.

“The question I kept asking them was, ‘How much am I going to owe?’” said Anderson, who is now insured by Medicare. “It could be anywhere from that $15,000 adjusted amount to the full balance of $59,000.”

Broadhurst said she tells patients facing similar situations to “send the hospital a copy of the EOB and ask them to correct the account to $0 patient responsibility.”

“Even if no one is actively trying to collect, I’d still push for written closure so it doesn’t keep hanging over them,” she said.

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by 麻豆女优 Health News and that dissects and explains medical bills. Since 2018, this series has helped many patients and readers get their medical bills reduced, and it has been cited in statehouses, at the U.S. Capitol, and at the White House. Do you have a confusing or outrageous medical bill you want to share? Tell us about it!

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/amnesia-arizona-hospital-prior-authorization-bill-of-the-month-may-2026/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

LISTEN: Quashing innovation or risking a patient’s health? Lauren Sausser told WAMU’s Health Hub on April 15 why the White House and some states are at odds over how to regulate AI in health care.

Speed, efficiency, and lower costs. Those are the traits artificial intelligence supporters celebrate. But the same qualities worry physicians who fear the technology could lead to insurance denials with humans left out of the loop.

With scant federal regulation, states are left to shape the rules on AI in health care. For residents in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, a divide is playing out on opposite sides of the Potomac River. Maryland and Virginia have taken very different approaches to regulating AI in health insurance.

麻豆女优 Health News correspondent Lauren Sausser joined WAMU’s Health Hub on April 15 to explain why where you live may determine how much of a role AI plays in your coverage.

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/wamu-health-hub-ai-state-regulation-april-15-2026/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Six months after a West Virginia man died following a protracted battle with his health insurer over doctor-recommended cancer care, the state’s Republican governor signed a bill intended to curb the harm of insurance denials.

West Virginia’s Public Employees Insurance Agency enrolls nearly 215,000 people — state workers, as well as their spouses and dependents. The new law, which will take effect June 10, will allow plan members who have been approved for a course of treatment to pursue an alternative, medically appropriate treatment of equal or lesser value without the need for another approval from the state-based health plan.

“This legislation is rooted in a simple principle: if a treatment has already been approved, patients should be able to pursue a medically appropriate alternative without being forced to start the process over again — especially when it does not cost more,” Gov. Patrick Morrisey said in a statement after signing the bill into law on March 31.

“This is about common sense, compassion, and trusting patients and their doctors to make the best decisions for their care,” he said.

Delegate Laura Kimble, the Republican from Harrison County who introduced the legislation, told 麻豆女优 Health News the measure offers “a rational solution” for patients facing “the most irrational and chaotic time of their lives.”

From Arizona to Rhode Island, at least half of all state legislatures have taken up bills this year related to prior authorization, a process that requires patients or their medical team to seek approval from an insurer before proceeding with care. These state efforts come as patients across the country await relief from prior authorization hurdles, as promised by dozens of major health insurers in a pledge announced by the Trump administration last year.

The West Virginia law was inspired by Eric Tennant, a coal-mining safety instructor from Bridgeport who died on Sept. 17 at age 58. In early 2025, the Public Employees Insurance Agency of a $50,000 noninvasive cancer treatment, called histotripsy, that would have used ultrasound waves to target, and potentially shrink, the largest tumor in his liver. His family didn’t expect the procedure to eradicate the cancer, but they hoped it would buy him more time and improve his quality of life. The insurer said the procedure wasn’t medically necessary and that it was considered “experimental and investigational.”

Becky Tennant, Eric’s widow, told members of a West Virginia House committee in late February that she submitted medical records, expert opinions, and data as part of several attempts to appeal the denial. She also reached out to “almost every one of our state representatives,” asking for help.

Nothing worked, she told lawmakers, until 麻豆女优 Health News and NBC News got involved and posed questions to the Public Employees Insurance Agency about Eric’s case. Only then did the insurer reverse its decision and approve histotripsy, Tennant said.

“But by then, the delay had already done its damage,” she said.

Within one week of the reversal in late May, Eric Tennant was hospitalized. His health continued to decline, and by midsummer he was no longer considered a suitable candidate for the procedure. “The insurance company’s decision did not simply delay care. It closed doors,” his wife said.

Had the new law been in effect, Kimble said, Tennant could have undergone histotripsy without preapproval, because it was a less expensive alternative to chemotherapy, which his insurer had already authorized. The bill was passed unanimously by the state legislature in March.

U.S. health insurers argue that most prior authorization requests are quickly, if not instantly, approved. AHIP, the health insurance industry trade group, says prior authorization in preventing potential harm to patients and reducing unnecessary health care costs. But denials and delays tend to affect patients who need expensive, time-sensitive care, .

The practice has come under intense scrutiny in recent years, particularly after the in New York City in late 2024. Americans rank prior authorization as their biggest burden when it comes to getting health care, according to a by 麻豆女优, a health information nonprofit that includes 麻豆女优 Health News.

Samantha Knapp, a spokesperson for the West Virginia Department of Administration, would not answer questions about the law’s financial impact on the state. “We prefer to avoid any speculation at this time regarding potential impact or actions,” Knapp said.

In a fiscal note attached to the bill, Jason Haught, the Public Employees Insurance Agency’s chief financial officer, said the law would cost the agency an estimated $13 million annually and “cause member disruption.”

West Virginia isn’t an outlier in targeting prior authorization. By late 2025, 48 other states, in addition to the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, already had some form of a prior authorization law — or laws — on the books, according to a by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.

Many states have set up “gold carding” programs, which allow physicians with a track record of approvals to bypass prior authorization requirements. Some states establish a maximum number of days insurance companies are allowed to respond to requests, while others prohibit insurance companies from issuing retrospective denials after a service has already been preauthorized. There are also a crop of new state laws seeking to regulate the use of artificial intelligence in prior authorization decision-making.

Meanwhile, prior authorization bills introduced this year across the country, including in Kentucky, Missouri, and New Jersey, have been supported by politicians from both parties.

“Republicans in conservative states see health care as a vulnerability for the midterm elections, and so, unsurprisingly, you’ll see some action on this,” said Robert Hartwig, a clinical associate professor of risk management, insurance, and finance at the University of South Carolina. “They realize that they’re not really going to get much action at the federal level given the degree of gridlock we’ve already seen.”

Last summer, the Trump administration announced a pledge signed by dozens of health insurers vowing to reform prior authorization. The insurers promised to reduce the scope of claims that require preapproval, decrease wait times, and communicate with patients in clear language when denying a request.

Consumers, patient advocates, and medical providers that companies will follow through on their promises.

Becky Tennant is skeptical, too. That’s why she advocated for the West Virginia bill.

“Families should not have to beg, appeal, or go public just to access time-sensitive care,” she told lawmakers. Tennant, who sees the bill’s passage as bittersweet, said she thought her husband would have been proud.

During Eric’s final hospital stay, Tennant recalled, right before he was discharged to home hospice care, she asked him whether he wanted her to keep fighting to change the state agency’s prior authorization process.

“‘Well, you need to at least try to change it,’” she recalled her husband saying. “‘Because it’s not fair.’”

“I told him I would keep trying,” she said, “at least for a while. And so I am keeping that promise to him.”

NBC News health and medical unit producer Jason Kane and correspondent Erin McLaughlin contributed to this report.

Do you have an experience with prior authorization you’d like to share? to tell 麻豆女优 Health News your story.

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/prior-authorization-insurance-delays-coverage-denials-state-laws-west-virginia/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

That’s why Ekirch, 31, of Henrico, Virginia, was stunned when she learned Anthem would finally have to pay for life-changing medical treatment.

For two years, she had battled the company to cover blood plasma infusions called intravenous immunoglobulin, or IVIG. The treatment has been shown, in some cases, to improve symptoms associated with small-fiber neuropathy, a condition that makes Ekirch’s limbs feel like they’re on fire.

But Anthem had repeatedly denied coverage for IVIG, which costs about $10,000 per infusion. Then, in February, an external review of her case conducted for the Virginia Bureau of Insurance overturned Anthem’s denial. It meant her parents would no longer need to withdraw money from her father’s retirement savings to pay out-of-pocket. Already, they’d spent about $90,000.

“My mom was sobbing. My dad was on his knees, sobbing. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him cry like that,” said Ekirch, describing her parents’ reaction to the reversal.

“I think I’m in shock from it all,” she said.

In a prepared statement, Stephanie DuBois, a spokesperson for Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, said IVIG did not “align with our evidence-based standards.” But she said the company respects “the external reviewer’s decision” to overturn the denial.

Meanwhile, each year millions of patients like Ekirch continue to face denials through the prior authorization process, which requires many patients or their doctors to seek preapproval from health insurers before proceeding with medical care. And despite promises of reform from insurance companies, denials remain a frustrating hallmark of the American health care system.

Last June, Trump administration officials announced in a press conference that health insurance leaders had pledged to simplify prior authorization by taking steps such as “” subject to preapproval. The insurers also promised faster turnaround times and “clear, easy-to-understand explanations” of their decisions.

Yet in February, when 麻豆女优 Health News contacted more than a dozen major insurers that signed the pledge, half of them failed to provide specifics about health care services for which they no longer require prior authorization.

A said the industry remains committed to the effort. But physicians, consumers, and patient advocates are pessimistic about the insurers’ willingness to follow through with these voluntary changes.

“They have no desire to do what’s in the best interest of the patient if it’s going to hurt their pockets,” said Matt Toresco, CEO of Archo Advocacy, a patient advocacy and consulting company.

“In the insurance world, the fiduciary responsibility is not to the patient,” he said. “It’s to the Street,” he said, referring to Wall Street.

Meaningful Change?

The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to questions for this article. The few updates the federal government has issued since June on prior authorization reform include a about ensuring clinicians can submit requests electronically.

AHIP, the health insurer trade group that issued the January press release, did not provide information about specific treatments, codes, medications, or procedures that its members have released from prior authorization since signing the pledge.

“We will have additional progress updates coming out later this spring,” said Kelly Parsons, a spokesperson for the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, which represents 33 independent Blue Cross and Blue Shield companies. She also offered no specifics.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield companies that cover patients in Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Tennessee either did not respond to questions for this article or deferred to the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association.

By contrast, other insurers cited specific examples of change.

Aetna CVS Health began “bundling” prior authorizations for musculoskeletal procedures, as well as for lung, breast, and prostate cancer patients, spokesperson Phil Blando said. This practice allows providers to file one authorization request for a patient’s treatment instead of several.

And Humana removed prior authorization requirements for “diagnostic services across colonoscopies,” among other changes, spokesperson Mark Taylor said.

UnitedHealthcare, which came under intense scrutiny for its use of prior authorization following the of one of its executives in late 2024, removed prior authorization requirements on Jan. 1 for “certain nuclear imaging, obstetrical ultrasound and echocardiogram procedures,” among other changes, spokesperson Matthew Rodriguez said.

Yet some health care insiders doubt these changes will amount to much.

“Insurers have made similar promises before and failed to deliver meaningful change,” said Bobby Mukkamala, president of the American Medical Association, which represents U.S. physicians and medical students.

In 2018, , including AHIP and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, announced a partnership “to identify opportunities to improve the prior authorization process.” Yet, in response to the June pledge, the process remains “costly, inefficient, opaque, and too often hazardous for patients.”

“Transparency is essential so everyone can see whether real reforms are happening,” he told 麻豆女优 Health News.

Curbed Enthusiasm

Prior authorization may be getting more political attention, but data shows patients 鈥� particularly those with chronic conditions that require ongoing medical treatment 鈥� continue to face barriers to doctor-recommended care.

Among patients in that group, 39% said prior authorization is “the single biggest burden” in receiving care, according to a by 麻豆女优, a health information nonprofit that includes 麻豆女优 Health News.

I was fighting to survive, and then I was fighting to convince someone that I deserved to survive.

Anna Hocum

That’s true for Payton Herres, 25, of Dayton, Ohio, who in 2012 received a heart transplant, which requires her to take an antirejection prescription medication for the rest of her life.

But last year, she said, Anthem denied coverage for the expensive drug. She’d been taking it for more than 10 years.

“I’ve been with Anthem my entire life, and then, all of a sudden 鈥� I don’t know what happened 鈥� they just started denying me over and over,” she said. “I almost ran out of medication.”

DuBois, the Anthem spokesperson, confirmed the company has approved the medication. It had not taken Herres’ treatment history into account when it denied coverage for the drug, DuBois said.

But Herres said the company will require her to obtain a new authorization for the medication in September.

“Are they going to deny other things, too?” she asked. “I hope I don’t have to keep fighting like this for the rest of my life.”

Anna Hocum, 25, is preparing for a similar fight. In 2024 and 2025, her insurer repeatedly denied coverage for expensive treatment used to slow the progression of a rare genetic condition that destroys her lung function.

“I just thought I was going to die,” said Hocum, of Milwaukee. “I was fighting to survive, and then I was fighting to convince someone that I deserved to survive.”

Like with Ekirch, Hocum’s parents paid while they waited for her insurance company to overturn the initial denials. Friends and family donated more than $30,000 through a GoFundMe campaign to help defray the costs.

Then last spring, Hocum said, her insurer reversed the denial without an apparent explanation. But the approval is valid for only 12 months, so she will need another prior authorization approval this year.

“It is scary,” she said. “It’s not guaranteed that it’ll be accepted.”

They fought me tooth and nail every step of the way, to the point that they made my life a living hell.

Sheldon Ekirch

Even though it’s a “huge relief” that Anthem is now obligated to cover Ekirch’s treatment, her mother doesn’t know if or how the family will recoup the money it has already paid.

In a letter to Ekirch confirming the external reviewer’s decision, Anthem explained that the authorization would be valid for a year beginning on Sept. 25, 2025. “We are pleased we can provide a favorable response in this case,” a grievance and appeals analyst for Anthem wrote.

Ekirch said the letter highlighted the company’s hypocrisy.

“They act as though they are a benevolent organization doing me a favor.” In reality, she said, “they fought me tooth and nail every step of the way, to the point that they made my life a living hell.”

Now, Ekirch’s access to IVIG may be in jeopardy again. Her COBRA coverage through Anthem expires in late March. In April, she will need to transition to a new insurance plan 鈥� and she’s bracing herself for another round of prior authorization.

“I just am so afraid that I don’t have the strength to go through and do what it takes,” Ekirch said, “to fight this battle again.”

Do you have an experience with prior authorization you’d like to share? to tell 麻豆女优 Health News your story.

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/prior-authorization-insurer-pledge-awaiting-reforms-patients-families-bills/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Regulating artificial intelligence, especially its use by health insurers, is becoming a politically divisive topic, and it’s scrambling traditional partisan lines.

Boosters, led by Trump, are not only pushing its integration into government, as in Medicare’s experiment using AI in prior authorization, but also trying to stop others from building curbs and guardrails. A December seeks to preempt most state efforts to govern AI, describing “a race with adversaries for supremacy” in a new “technological revolution.”

“To win, United States AI companies must be free to innovate without cumbersome regulation,” Trump’s order said. “But excessive State regulation thwarts this imperative.”

Across the nation, states are in revolt. At least four 鈥� Arizona, Maryland, Nebraska, and Texas 鈥� enacted legislation last year reining in the use of AI in health insurance. Two others, Illinois and California, enacted bills the year before.

Legislators in Rhode Island plan to try again this year after a bill requiring regulators to collect data on technology use failed to clear both chambers last year. A bill in North Carolina requiring insurers not to use AI as the sole basis of a coverage decision attracted significant interest from Republican legislators last year.

DeSantis, a former GOP presidential candidate, has rolled out an “AI Bill of Rights,” include restrictions on its use in processing insurance claims and a requirement allowing a state regulatory body to inspect algorithms.

“We have a responsibility to ensure that new technologies develop in ways that are moral and ethical, in ways that reinforce our American values, not in ways that erode them,” DeSantis said during his State of the State address in January.

Ripe for Regulation

Polling shows Americans are skeptical of AI. A from Fox News found 63% of voters describe themselves as “very” or “extremely” concerned about artificial intelligence, including majorities across the political spectrum. Nearly two-thirds of Democrats and just over 3 in 5 Republicans said they had qualms about AI.

Health insurers’ tactics to hold down costs also trouble the public; from 麻豆女优 found widespread discontent over issues like prior authorization. (麻豆女优 is a health information nonprofit that includes 麻豆女优 Health News.) Reporting and in recent years has highlighted the use of algorithms to rapidly deny insurance claims or prior authorization requests, apparently with little review by a doctor.

Last month, the House Ways and Means Committee hauled in executives from Cigna, UnitedHealth Group, and other major health insurers to address concerns about affordability. When pressed, the executives either denied or avoided talking about using the most advanced technology to reject authorization requests or toss out claims.

AI is “never used for a denial,” Cigna CEO David Cordani told lawmakers. Like others in the health insurance industry, the company is being sued for its methods of denying claims, as spotlighted by ProPublica. Cigna spokesperson Justine Sessions said the company’s claims-denial process “is not powered by AI.”

Indeed, companies are at pains to frame AI as a loyal servant. Optum, part of health giant UnitedHealth Group, announced Feb. 4 that it was rolling out tech-powered prior authorization, with plenty of mentions of speedier approvals.

“We’re transforming the prior authorization process to address the friction it causes,” John Kontor, a senior vice president at Optum,

Still, Alex Bores, a computer scientist and New York Assembly member prominent in the state’s legislative debate over AI, which culminated in a comprehensive bill governing the technology, said AI is a natural field to regulate.

“So many people already find the answers that they’re getting from their insurance companies to be inscrutable,” said Bores, a Democrat who is running for Congress. “Adding in a layer that cannot by its nature explain itself doesn’t seem like it’ll be helpful there.”

At least some people in medicine 鈥� doctors, for example 鈥� are cheering legislators and regulators on. The American Medical Association “supports state regulations seeking greater accountability and transparency from commercial health insurers that use AI and machine learning tools to review prior authorization requests,” said John Whyte, the organization’s CEO.

Whyte said insurers already use AI and “doctors still face delayed patient care, opaque insurer decisions, inconsistent authorization rules, and crushing administrative work.”

Insurers Push Back

With legislation approved or pending in at least nine states, it’s unclear how much of an effect the state laws will have, said University of Minnesota law professor Daniel Schwarcz. States can’t regulate “self-insured” plans, which are used by many employers; only the federal government has that power.

But there are deeper issues, Schwarcz said: Most of the state legislation he’s seen would require a human to sign off on any decision proposed by AI but doesn’t specify what that means.

The laws don’t offer a clear framework for understanding how much review is enough, and over time humans tend to become a little lazy and simply sign off on any suggestions by a computer, he said.

Still, insurers view the spate of bills as a problem. “Broadly speaking, regulatory burden is real,” said Dan Jones, senior vice president for federal affairs at the Alliance of Community Health Plans, a trade group for some nonprofit health insurers. If insurers spend more time working through a patchwork of state and federal laws, he continued, that means “less time that can be spent and invested into what we’re intended to be doing, which is focusing on making sure that patients are getting the right access to care.”

Linda Ujifusa, a Democratic state senator in Rhode Island, said insurers came out last year against the bill she sponsored to restrict AI use in coverage denials. It passed in one chamber, though not the other.

“There’s tremendous opposition” to anything that regulates tactics such as prior authorization, she said, and “tremendous opposition” to identifying intermediaries such as private insurers or pharmacy benefit managers “as a problem.”

In a , AHIP, an insurer trade group, advocated for “balanced policies that promote innovation while protecting patients.”

“Health plans recognize that AI has the potential to drive better health care outcomes 鈥� enhancing patient experience, closing gaps in care, accelerating innovation, and reducing administrative burden and costs to improve the focus on patient care,” Chris Bond, an AHIP spokesperson, told 麻豆女优 Health News. And, he continued, they need a “consistent, national approach anchored in a comprehensive federal AI policy framework.”

Seeking Balance

In California, Newsom has signed some laws regulating AI, including one requiring health insurers to ensure their algorithms are fairly and equitably applied. But the Democratic governor has vetoed others with a broader approach, such as a bill including more mandates about how the technology must work and requirements to disclose its use to regulators, clinicians, and patients upon request.

Chris Micheli, a Sacramento-based lobbyist, said the governor likely wants to ensure the state budget 鈥� consistently powered by outsize stock market gains, especially from tech companies 鈥� stays flush. That necessitates balance.

Newsom is trying to “ensure that financial spigot continues, and at the same time ensure that there are some protections for California consumers,” he said. He added insurers believe they’re subject to a welter of regulations already.

The Trump administration seems persuaded. The president’s recent executive order proposed to sue and restrict certain federal funding for any state that enacts what it characterized as “excessive” state regulation 鈥� with some exceptions, including for policies that protect children.

That order is possibly unconstitutional, said Carmel Shachar, a health policy scholar at Harvard Law School. The source of preemption authority is generally Congress, she said, and federal lawmakers twice took up, but ultimately declined to pass, a provision barring states from regulating AI.

“Based on our previous understanding of federalism and the balance of powers between Congress and the executive, a challenge here would be very likely to succeed,” Shachar said.

Some lawmakers view Trump’s order skeptically at best, noting the administration has been removing guardrails, and preventing others from erecting them, to an extreme degree.

“There isn’t really a question of, should it be federal or should it be state right now?” Bores said. “The question is, should it be state or not at all?”

Do you have an experience navigating prior authorization to get medical treatment that you’d like to share with us for our reporting? Share it with us here.

This <a target="_blank" href="/insurance/artificial-intelligence-ai-health-insurance-companies-state-regulation-trump/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Now, though, it seems unlikely to become state law. In November, a vote to advance beyond a legislative subcommittee failed. Four out of six Republicans on the Senate Medical Affairs Committee subpanel refused to vote on the measure.

Republican state Sen. Jeff Zell said during a November subcommittee hearing that he wanted to help “move this pro-life football down the field and to save as many babies as we can.” Still, he could not support the bill as written.

“What I am interested in is speaking on behalf of the South Carolinian,” he said, “and they’re not interested in this bill right now or this issue right now.”

While that bill stalled, it signals that abortion will continue to loom large during 2026 legislative sessions. More than three years after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, measures related to abortion have already been prefiled in several states, including Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Missouri, and Virginia.

Meanwhile, the South Carolina bill also exposed a rift among Republicans. Some GOP lawmakers are eager to appeal to their most conservative supporters by pursuing more restrictive abortion laws, despite the lack of support for such measures among most voters.

Until recently, the idea of charging women who obtain abortions with a crime was considered “politically toxic,” said Steven Greene, a political science professor at North Carolina State University.

Yet introduced “abortion as homicide” bills during 2024-2025 legislative sessions, many of which included the death penalty as a potential sentence, according to Dana Sussman, senior vice president of Pregnancy Justice, an organization that tracks the criminalization of pregnancy outcomes.

Even though none of those bills was signed into law, Sussman called this “a hugely alarming trend.”

“My fear is that one of these will end up passing,” she said.

Less than a month after the bill stalled in South Carolina, 鈥� which would create criminal penalties for “coercion to obtain an abortion” 鈥� was prefiled ahead of the Jan. 13 start of the state’s legislative session.

“The issue is not going away. It’s a moral issue,” said state Sen. Richard Cash, who introduced the abortion bill that stalled in the subcommittee. “How far we can go, and what successes we can have, remain to be seen.”

鈥榃rongful Death’

Florida law already bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. But a Republican lawmaker introduced for the “wrongful death” of a fetus. If enacted, the measure will allow parents to sue for the death of an unborn child, making them eligible for compensation, including damages for mental pain and suffering.

The bill says neither the mother nor a medical provider giving “lawful” care could be sued. But anyone else deemed to have acted with “negligence,” including someone who helps procure abortion-inducing pills or a doctor who performs an abortion after six weeks, could be sued by one of the parents.

In Missouri, a constitutional amendment to legalize abortion passed in 2024 with 51.6% of the vote. In 2026, state lawmakers are asking voters to repeal the amendment they just passed. A new proposed amendment would effectively reinstate the state’s ban on most abortions, with new exceptions for cases of rape, incest, and medical emergencies.

“I think that’s a middle-of-the-road, common sense proposal that most Missourians will agree with,” said , a Republican state representative who to put the measure on the ballot.

Lewis said the 2024 amendment went too far in allowing a legal basis to challenge all of Missouri’s abortion restrictions, sometimes called “targeted regulation of abortion providers,” or TRAP, laws. Even before Missouri’s outright ban, the number of abortions recorded in the state had dropped from to .

Meanwhile, Lewis backed another proposed constitutional amendment that will appear on the 2026 ballot. That measure would make it harder for Missourians to amend the state constitution, by requiring any amendment to receive a majority of votes in each congressional district.

One analysis suggested as few as any ballot measure under the proposal. Lewis dismissed the analysis as a “Democratic talking point.”

鈥楪errymandered’ Districts

Republican lawmakers aren’t necessarily aiming to pass abortion laws that appeal to the broadest swath of voters in their states.

Polling conducted ahead of Missouri’s vote in 2024 showed 52% of the state’s likely voters supported the constitutional amendment to protect access to abortion, a narrow majority that was consistent with the final vote.

In Texas, state law offers no exceptions for abortion in cases of rape or incest, even though a 2025 survey found 83% of Texans believe the procedure should be legal under those conditions.

In South Carolina, a 2024 poll found only 31% of respondents supported the state’s existing six-week abortion ban, which prohibits the procedure in most cases after fetal cardiac activity can be detected.

But Republicans hold supermajorities in the South Carolina General Assembly, and some continue to push for a near-total abortion ban even though such a law would probably be broadly unpopular. That’s because district lines have been drawn in such a way that politicians are more likely to be ousted by a more conservative member of their own party in a primary than defeated by a Democrat in a general election, said Scott Huffmon, director of the Center for Public Opinion & Policy Research at Winthrop University.

The South Carolina legislature is “so gerrymandered that more than half of the seats in both chambers were uncontested in the last general election. Whoever wins the primary wins the seat,” Huffmon said. “The best way to win the primary 鈥� or, better yet, prevent a primary challenge at all 鈥� is to run to the far right and embrace the policies of the most conservative people in the district.”

That’s what some proposals, including the “abortion as homicide” bills, reflect, said Greene, the North Carolina State professor. Lawmakers could vote for such a measure and suffer “very minimal, if any,” political backlash, he said.

“Most of the politicians passing these laws are more concerned with making the base happy than with actually dramatically reducing the number of abortions that take place within their jurisdiction,” Greene said.

Yet the number of abortions performed in South Carolina has dropped dramatically 鈥� by 63% from 2023 to 2024, when the state enacted the existing ban, according to data published by the state’s Department of Public Health.

Kimya Forouzan, a policy adviser with the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion legislation throughout the country and advocates for reproductive rights, said South Carolina’s attempt to pass “the most extreme bill that we have seen” is “part of a pattern.”

“I think the push for anti-abortion legislation exists throughout the country,” she said. “There are a lot of battles that are brewing.”

麻豆女优 Health News correspondent Daniel Chang and Southern bureau chief Sabriya Rice contributed to this report.

This <a target="_blank" href="/courts/abortion-ban-republican-lawmakers-prosecuting-women-south-carolina/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Spartanburg County, in South Carolina’s Upstate region, has been fighting a measles outbreak since early October, with more than 50 cases identified. Health officials have encouraged people who are unvaccinated to get a shot by visiting its mobile vaccine clinic at any of its several stops throughout the county.

But on a Monday afternoon in Boiling Springs, only one person showed up.

“It’s progress. That progress is slow,” Linda Bell, the state epidemiologist with the Department of Public Health, said during a recent press briefing. “We had hoped to see a more robust uptake than that in our mobile health units.”

As South Carolina tries to contain its measles outbreak, public health officials across the nation are concerned that the highly contagious virus is making a major comeback. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has tallied and 45 outbreaks in 2025. The largest started , where hundreds of people were infected and two children died.

For the first time in more than two decades, the United States is poised to lose its measles , a designation indicating that outbreaks are rare and rapidly contained.

South Carolina’s measles outbreak isn’t yet as large as those in other states, such as , , and . But it shows how a confluence of larger national trends 鈥� including historically low vaccination rates, skepticism fueled by the pandemic, misinformation, and “health freedom” ideologies proliferated by conservative politicians 鈥� have put some communities at risk for the reemergence of a preventable, potentially deadly virus.

“Everyone talks about it being the canary in the coal mine because it’s the most contagious infectious disease out there,” said Josh Michaud, associate director for global and public health policy at 麻豆女优, a health information nonprofit that includes 麻豆女优 Health News. “The logic is indisputable that we’re likely to see more outbreaks.”

Schools and 鈥楽mall Brush Fires’

Spartanburg’s vaccination rate is among the lowest of South Carolina’s 46 counties. And that was true “even before covid,” said Chris Lombardozzi, a senior vice president with the Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System.

Nearly 6,000 children in Spartanburg County schools last year 鈥� 10% of the total enrollment 鈥� either received an exemption allowing them to forgo required vaccinations or did not meet vaccine requirements, according to data published by the state.

Lombardozzi said the county’s low vaccination rate is tied to misinformation not only published on social media but also spread by “a variety of nonmedical leaders over the years.”

The pandemic made things worse. Michaud said that fear and misinformation surrounding covid vaccines “threw gasoline on the fire of people’s vaccine skepticism.” In some cases, that skepticism transferred to childhood vaccines, which historically have been less controversial, he said.

This made communities like Spartanburg County with low vaccination rates more vulnerable. “Which is why we’re seeing constant, small brush fires of measles outbreaks,” Michaud said.

In Spartanburg, the overall percentage of students with required immunizations fell from 95.1% to 90% between the 2020-21 and 2024-25 academic years. Public health officials say a minimum of 95% is required to prevent significant spread of measles.

Children who attend public and private schools in South Carolina are required to show that they’ve received some vaccinations, including the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, but religious exemptions are relatively easy to obtain. The exemption form must be notarized, but it does not require a doctor’s note or any disclosure about the family’s religious beliefs.

The number of students in South Carolina who have been granted religious exemptions has increased dramatically over the past decade. That’s particularly true in the Upstate region, where religious exemptions have increased sixfold from a decade ago. During the 2013-14 school year, 2,044 students in the Upstate were granted a religious exemption to the vaccine requirements, according to . By fall 2024, that number had jumped to more than 13,000.

Some schools are more exposed than others. The beginning of the South Carolina outbreak was largely linked to one public charter school, Global Academy of South Carolina, where only 17% of the 605 students enrolled during the 2024-25 school year provided documentation showing they had received their required vaccinations, according to data published by the Department of Public Health.

No one from Global Academy responded to interview requests.

鈥楬ealth Freedom’

In April, after visiting a Texas family whose daughter had died from measles, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote on social media that the “most effective way to prevent the spread of measles is the MMR vaccine.” He made a similar statement during an interview on “Dr. Phil” later that month.

But these endorsements stand at odds with other statements Kennedy has made that cast doubt on vaccine safety and have falsely linked vaccines with autism. The CDC, under his authority, now claims such links “.”

“What would I do if I could go back in time and I could avoid giving my children the vaccines that I gave them?” he said on a podcast in 2020. “I would do anything for that. I would pay anything to be able to do that.”

Throughout 2025, he has made other . During a congressional hearing in September, Kennedy defended his past claims that he was not anti-vaccine but affirmed his stated position that no vaccines are safe or effective.

Emily Hilliard, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, told 麻豆女优 Health News that Kennedy is “pro-safety, pro-transparency, and pro-accountability.” Hilliard said HHS is working with “state and local partners in South Carolina” and in other states to provide support during the measles outbreaks.

Meanwhile, Kennedy has frequently championed the idea of health freedom, or freedom of choice, regarding vaccines, a talking point that has taken root among Republicans.

That has had a “chilling effect all the way down through state and local lawmakers,” Michaud said, making some leaders hesitant to talk about the threat that the ongoing measles outbreaks poses or the effectiveness and safety of the MMR vaccine.

Brandon Charochak, a spokesperson for South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, said the governor was not available to be interviewed for this article but referenced McMaster’s comment from October that measles “is a dangerous disease, but in terms of diseases, it’s not one that we should panic about.”

On a separate occasion that month, the Republican governor said he does not support vaccine mandates. “We’re not going to have mandates,” he said, “and I think we are responding properly.”

Even though the South Carolina Department of Public Health has repeatedly encouraged measles vaccines, the push has been notably quieter than the agency’s covid vaccine outreach efforts.

In 2021, for example, the agency partnered with breweries throughout the state for a campaign called “Shot and a Chaser,” which rewarded people who got a covid vaccine with a free beer or soda. By contrast, the pop-up measles vaccine clinic at the Boiling Springs Library featured no flashy signage, no freebies, and wasn’t visible from the library’s main entrance.

Edward Simmer, interim director of the Department of Public Health, would not speak to 麻豆女优 Health News about the measles outbreak. During a legislative hearing in April, Republican state lawmakers voted against his permanent confirmation because of his past support for covid vaccines and masking. One lawmaker specifically criticized the agency during that hearing for the Shot and a Chaser campaign.

Public health officials in other states also have been blocked from new roles because of their covid response. In Missouri, where among kindergartners since 2020 and measles cases have been reported this year, Republican lawmakers in 2022 after vaccine opponents protested his appointment.

In South Carolina, Simmer, lacking lawmakers’ confirmation, leads the public health agency in an interim capacity.

South Carolina Sen. Tom Davis of Beaufort was the only Republican on the Senate Medical Affairs Committee who voted to confirm Simmer in April. He told 麻豆女优 Health News that his Republican colleagues raised valid questions about Simmer’s past support for covid vaccines.

But, Davis said, it would be “tremendously unfortunate and not beneficial from a public health perspective” if the Republican Party just took a stance against vaccines “as a matter of policy.”

The Department of Public Health had administered 44 doses of the MMR vaccine through its mobile health unit from October to mid-November. The last mobile vaccine clinic was scheduled for Nov. 24. But health officials are encouraged that patients are seeking vaccines elsewhere. The agency’s tracking system shows that providers across Spartanburg County administered more than twice as many measles vaccines in October as they did a year ago.

As of mid-November, more than 130 people remained in quarantine, most of them students at local elementary and middle schools. Cases have also been linked to a church and Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport.

“We’re reminding people that travel for the upcoming holidays increases the risk of exposures greatly,” said Bell, the state epidemiologist. “Due to that risk, we’re encouraging people to consider getting vaccinated now.”

麻豆女优 Health News correspondent Amy Maxmen contributed to this report.

This <a target="_blank" href="/news/measles-outbreak-south-carolina-vaccine-misinformation-kennedy-rfk/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

“It’s good to be home,” he said after one hospital stay in early June, “yet I’m tired and ready to get on with things.”

In 2023, Tennant, of Bridgeport, West Virginia, was diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma, a rare cancer of the bile ducts that had spread throughout his body.

None of the initial treatments prescribed by his doctors had eradicated the cancer. But a glimmer of hope came in early 2025, when Tennant was recommended for histotripsy, a relatively new procedure that would use ultrasound waves to target, and potentially destroy, the largest tumor in his body 鈥� in his liver.

“My dad was a little nervous because it was something new, but it definitely gave us some hope that he would be around a little bit longer,” said Tennant’s daughter, Amiya.

There was just one hitch: His insurer wouldn’t pay for it.

Tennant, 58, died of cancer on Sept. 17. His story illustrates how a bureaucratic process called prior authorization can devastate patients and their families.

It’s infeasible to count the people harmed by this , which, by delaying or denying care, helps drive health insurers’ profits. No government agency or private group tracks such data.

That said, 麻豆女优 Health News has heard from hundreds of patients in recent years who claim that they or someone in their family has been harmed by prior authorization. More than 1 in 4 physicians in December said that prior authorization had led to a serious adverse event for a patient in their care. And 8% responded that prior authorization led to a disability, birth defect, or death.

In June, the Trump administration announced a pledge, signed by dozens of private insurers, to streamline prior authorization, which often requires patients or their medical teams to ask insurers for permission before proceeding with many types of care. It remains unclear when patients can expect to see improvement.

The commitments “depend on the full cooperation of the private insurance sector” and will “take time to achieve their full effect,” said Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services. But the pledge exists, he said, “to prevent tragic deaths like Eric’s from occurring at the hands of an inefficient system.”

Chris Bond, a spokesperson for AHIP, a health insurance industry trade group, said he could not speak to any specific insurer’s prior authorization policies. Broadly, though, he said prior authorization “acts as a guardrail” to make sure medicines and treatments are not used inappropriately.

At the same time, he said, insurers recognize that patients can be frustrated when their doctor-recommended care is denied. That’s why “there is a dedicated effort across the industry to make the process more straightforward, faster, and simpler for patients and providers,” Bond said.

In the meantime, the process continues to take its toll on people like Eric Tennant, whose grave diagnoses often require expensive health care services.

“Eric is gone,” his widow, Becky, said. “He’s not coming back.”

Tennant was a safety instructor for the West Virginia Office of Miners’ Health Safety and Training and insured by the state’s Public Employees Insurance Agency, which contracts with UnitedHealthcare to administer benefits for state employees, their spouses, and dependents.

In February and March, UnitedHealthcare, the Public Employees Insurance Agency, and an outside reviewer issued a series of denials that concluded Eric’s benefits would not cover histotripsy, claiming the treatment was not medically necessary. Becky Tennant estimated the procedure would cost the family about $50,000 out-of-pocket.

Although the treatment wasn’t guaranteed to work, it was worth a shot, the Tennants thought, so they considered withdrawing money from their retirement savings. But then, in May, after 麻豆女优 Health News and NBC News posed a series of questions to UnitedHealthcare and the Public Employees Insurance Agency about Eric’s case, the agency reversed course. PEIA decided to cover his treatment.

Notably, the agency contacted 麻豆女优 Health News about the approval hours before it notified the Tennant family of the decision.

But the approval came too late. Eric was hospitalized in late May and prescribed medication that prevented him from undergoing histotripsy at that time. His family held out hope that his health would improve and he would qualify for the procedure that summer.

In July, they took a family vacation to Marco Island, Florida. It would be their last. Two days after they returned home, a scan revealed Eric’s cancer had continued to spread. Histotripsy was out of the question.

“I’m sad for what we will miss out on,” Becky said. “I’m sad at the unfairness of it.”

She said if Eric had been able to undergo histotripsy in February, as originally recommended by his doctor, it might have destroyed the tumor in his liver that ultimately killed him.

“We’ll never know. That’s the thing. Any lawyer for the insurance will say, 鈥榃ell, you don’t know it would have helped.’ No. You took that chance away from us,” she said.

In October, Samantha Knapp, a spokesperson for the West Virginia Department of Administration, told 麻豆女优 Health News that the Public Employees Insurance Agency has not changed its policies related to prior authorization for histotripsy and continues to follow UnitedHealthcare’s guidelines.

UnitedHealthcare declined to answer questions for this article.

On Sept. 17, in a hospice bed set up in their dining room, Eric was surrounded by his family and their dogs as he died. Becky held his hand as his heart rate began to drop.

“He wasn’t afraid to die, but he didn’t want to die,” she said. “And you could tell the last day that he was fighting it big time.”

At the very end, she whispered in his ear: “You know I love you. You have been the best husband and the best dad, and you’ve always taken such good care of us,” Becky recalled.

And then, she said, he gasped. His eyebrows seemed to shoot up in wonder. During his last moment alive, she said, he smiled.

“The look on his face was pure, total amazement,” she said. “I still can’t believe he’s not here.”

Do you have an experience with prior authorization you’d like to share? to tell 麻豆女优 Health News your story.

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-industry/prior-authorization-denials-cancer-treatment-west-virginia-death/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

She didn’t notice the tiny bug until Monday, when her calf muscle began to feel sore. She made an appointment that morning with a telehealth doctor 鈥� one recommended by her health insurance plan 鈥� who prescribed a 10-day course of doxycycline to prevent Lyme disease and strongly suggested she be seen in person. So, later that day, she went to a walk-in clinic near her home in Brunswick, Maine.

And it’s a good thing she did. Clinic staffers found another tick on her body during the same visit. Not only that, one of the ticks tested positive for Lyme, a bacterial infection that, if untreated, can  affecting the nervous system, heart, and joints. Clinicians prescribed a stronger, single dose of the prescription medication.

“I could have gotten really ill,” Kovitch said.

But Kovitch’s insurer denied coverage for the walk-in visit. Its reason? She hadn’t obtained a referral or preapproval for it. “Your plan doesn’t cover this type of care without it, so we denied this charge,” a document from her insurance company explained.

Health insurers have long argued that prior authorization 鈥� when health plans require approval from an insurer before someone receives treatment 鈥� reduces waste and fraud, as well as potential harm to patients. And while insurance denials are often associated with high-cost care, such as cancer treatment, Kovitch’s tiny tick bite exposes how prior authorization policies can apply to treatments that are considered inexpensive and medically necessary.

Pledging To Fix the Process

The Trump administration announced this summer that dozens of private health insurers agreed to make sweeping changes to the prior authorization process. The pledge includes releasing certain medical services from prior authorization requirements altogether. Insurers also agreed to extend a grace period to patients who switch health plans, so they won’t immediately encounter new preapproval rules that disrupt ongoing treatment.

Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said during a June press conference that some of the changes would be in place by January. But, so far, the federal government has offered few specifics about which diagnostic codes tagged to medical services for billing purposes will be exempt from prior authorization 鈥� or how private companies will be held accountable. It’s not clear whether Lyme disease cases like Kovitch’s would be exempt from preauthorization.

Chris Bond, a spokesperson for AHIP, the health insurance industry’s main trade group, said that insurers have committed to implementing some changes by Jan. 1. Other will take longer. For example, insurers agreed to answer 80% of prior authorization approvals in “real time,” but not until 2027.

Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, told 麻豆女优 Health News that the changes promised by private insurers are intended to “cut red tape, accelerate care decisions, and encourage transparency,” but they will “take time to achieve their full effect.”

Meanwhile, some health policy experts are skeptical that private insurers will make good on the pledge. This isn’t the first time major health insurers have vowed to reform prior authorization.

, president of the American Medical Association, that the promises made by health insurers in June to fix the system are “nearly identical” to those the insurance industry .

“I think this is a scam,” said Neal Shah, author of the book “.”

Insurers signed on to President Donald Trump’s pledge to ease public pressure, Shah said. Collective outrage directed at insurance companies was particularly intense following the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December. Oz specifically said that the pledge by health insurers was made in response to “violence in the streets.”

Shah, for one, doesn’t believe companies will follow through in a meaningful way.

“The denials problem is getting worse,” said Shah, who co-founded , a company that helps patients appeal insurance denials by using artificial intelligence. “There’s no accountability.”

Cracking the Case

Kovitch’s bill for her clinic appointment was $238, and she paid for it out-of-pocket after learning that her insurance company, Anthem, didn’t plan to cover a cent. First, she tried appealing the denial. She even obtained a retroactive referral from her primary care doctor supporting the necessity of the clinic visit.

It didn’t work. Anthem again denied coverage for the visit. When Kovitch called to learn why, she said she was left with the impression that the Anthem representative she spoke to couldn’t figure it out.

“It was like over their heads or something,” Kovitch said. “This was all they would say, over and over again: that it lacked prior authorization.”

Jim Turner, a spokesperson for Anthem, later attributed Kovitch’s denials to “a billing error” made by MaineHealth, the health system that operates the walk-in clinic where she sought care. MaineHealth’s error “resulted in the claim being processed as a specialist visit instead of a walk-in center/urgent care visit,” Turner told 麻豆女优 Health News.

He did not provide documentation demonstrating how the billing error occurred. Medical records supplied by Kovitch show MaineHealth coded her walk-in visit as “tick bite of left lower leg, initial encounter,” and it’s not clear why Anthem interpreted that as a specialist visit.

After 麻豆女优 Health News contacted Anthem with questions about Kovitch’s bill, Turner said that the company “should have identified the billing error sooner in the process than we did and we apologize for the confusion this caused Ms. Kovitch.”

Caroline Cornish, a spokesperson for MaineHealth, said this isn’t the only time Anthem has denied coverage for patients seeking walk-in or urgent care at MaineHealth. She said Anthem’s processing rules are sometimes misapplied to walk-in visits, leading to “inappropriate denials.”

She said these visits should not require prior authorization and Kovitch’s case illustrates how insurance companies often use administrative denials as a first response.

“MaineHealth believes insurers should focus on paying for the care their members need, rather than creating obstacles that delay coverage and risk discouraging patients from seeking care,” she said. “The system is too often tilted against the very people it is meant to serve.”

Meanwhile, in October, Anthem sent Kovitch an updated explanation of benefits showing that a combination of insurance company payments and discounts would cover the entire cost of the appointment. She said a company representative called her and apologized. In early November, she received her $238 refund.

But she recently found out that her annual eye appointment now requires a referral from her primary care provider, according to new rules laid out by Anthem.

“The trend continues,” she said. “Now I am more savvy to their ways.”

This <a target="_blank" href="/health-care-costs/prior-authorization-walk-in-clinic-tick-bite-coverage-denial/">article</a&gt; first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="">麻豆女优 Health News</a> and is republished here under a <a target="_blank" href=" Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src="/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=150&quot; style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">